1.
Law of the United Kingdom
–
The United Kingdom has three legal systems, each of which applies to a particular geographical area. First, English law, applies in England and Wales, second, Northern Ireland law, which applies in Northern Ireland, is based on common-law principles. Third, Scots law, which applies in Scotland, is a system based on civil-law principles. The United Kingdom does not have a legal system because it was created by the political union of previously independent countries. Article 19 of the Treaty of Union, put into effect by the Acts of Union in 1707, created the Kingdom of Great Britain, but guaranteed the continued existence of Scotlands separate legal system. The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is the highest court in the land for all criminal and civil cases in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, the Supreme Court came into being in October 2009, replacing the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords. In England and Wales, the system is headed by the Senior Courts of England and Wales, consisting of the Court of Appeal, the High Court of Justice. The Courts of Northern Ireland follow the same pattern, in Scotland the chief courts are the Court of Session, for civil cases, and the High Court of Justiciary, for criminal cases. Sheriff courts have no equivalent outside Scotland, as they deal with criminal and civil caseloads. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is the highest court of appeal for several independent Commonwealth countries, the British overseas territories, there are also immigration courts with UK-wide jurisdiction — the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal and Special Immigration Appeals Commission. The Employment tribunals and the Employment Appeal Tribunal have jurisdiction throughout Great Britain, there are three distinct legal jurisdictions in the United Kingdom, England and Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Each has its own system, distinct history and origins. English law is a term of art and it refers to the legal system administered by the courts in England and Wales, which rule on both civil and criminal matters. English law is renowned as being the mother of the law and is based on those principles. English law can be described as having its own legal doctrine and these judgements are binding in future similar cases, and for this reason are often reported. g. The Law Merchant began in the Pie-Powder Courts, see Court of Piepowder, the year 1189 was defined in 1276 as being the boundary of time immemorial. The courts of England and Wales are headed by the Senior Courts of England and Wales, consisting of the Court of Appeal, the High Court of Justice, on appeal, a court may overrule the decisions of its inferior courts, such as county courts and magistrates courts. The High Court may also quash on judicial review both administrative decisions of the Government and delegated legislation, Scottish influence may have influenced the abolition of the forms of action in the nineteenth century and extensive procedural reforms in the twentieth

2.
Anti-social behaviour order
–
An anti-social behaviour order was a civil order made in the United Kingdom against a person who had been shown, on the balance of evidence, to have engaged in anti-social behaviour. The orders were introduced by Prime Minister Tony Blair in 1998 and they were designed to correct minor incidents that would not ordinarily warrant criminal prosecution. The orders restricted behaviour in some way, such as prohibiting a return to an area or shop. Many saw the ASBO as connected with young delinquents, ASBOs were superseded by the Injunction and the Criminal Behaviour Order which were introduced by the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. ASBOs were introduced in England, Scotland and Wales through the Crime, Scotland, however, had a pre-existing tribunal system charged with dealing with children and young persons who offend, the Childrens Hearings System. In a press release of 28 October 2004, Tony Blair and David Blunkett announced further measures to extend the use, the remit would include, Extension of the Witness Protection Programme in anti-social behaviour cases. More offences including dog-fouling, litter, graffiti, and night-time noise liable for Fixed Penalty Notices, giving parish councils the power to issue fixed penalty notices for infringements. The press release concluded by remarking, In the past year around 100,000 cases of social behaviour have been dealt with. 2,633 ASBOs and 418 dispersal orders have been issued in the same period, on 25 October 2005, Transport for London announced its intent to apply for a new law giving them the authority to issue orders against repeat fare dodgers, and increased fines. The first ever ASBO was given to offender Kat Richards for repeated drunk, by 31 March 2004,2,455 ASBOs had been issued in England and Wales. On 30 March 2006, the Home Office announced that 7,356 Anti-Social Behaviour Orders had been out since 1999 in England. The 2010 coalition government expressed its intention to replace ASBOs, citing the reasons that breach rates are high, the bill was criticised for the broad and undefined scope of Nuisance and Annoyance and defeated in the House of Lords in January 2014. The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 received Royal Assent in March 2014 and this streamlined the tools available to tackle anti-social behaviour and replaced the ASBO with an Injunction and a Criminal Behaviour Order. In England and Wales they were issued by courts. The British government introduced ASBOs through the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, in the UK, a CRASBO was a criminally related ASBO. One local authority published photos of those given ASBOs on an Internet site, although the proceedings were civil, the court had to apply a heightened civil standard of proof. This standard was virtually indistinguishable from the criminal standard, the applicant had to satisfy the court so that it is sure that the defendant has acted in an anti-social manner. Pursuant to section 1 Civil Evidence Act 1995, an applicant had the right to rely on witness statements without calling the makers of those statements – known as hearsay

3.
Registration of architects in the United Kingdom
–
The Architects Registration Board constituted under the Act is responsible for Architects Registration in the United Kingdom and is required to publish the current version of the Register annually. Every person who is entitled to be registered under the Act has the right to be entered in the Register, the Act consolidated previous enactments originating with the Architects Act,1931 as amended by the Architects Registration Act 1938. It applies to England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, section 2 of the Act prescribes that the Board shall appoint and regulate the functions ascribed to the Registrar. The Act refers to the Registrar by the pronoun in the singular, but by the usual rules of statutory interpretation. An amendment under the European Communities Act 1972 came into force on 20 June 2008, for the purposes of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006, regulatory function is defined in subsection 32. Under subsection 20 of the Architects Act 1997, a person in the United Kingdom may only practise or carry on business under any name, there is no restriction on its use in any other circumstance. The words in the current Act follow those of the 1938 Architects Registration Act under which it was decided that the use of the suffix FRIBA in business notepaper constituted an infringement, the subsection makes no provision for levying any fee. Opinions had been divided for well over a century about the merits of statutory registration of architects in the United Kingdom, in relation to statutory protection of title, three aspects of the field in which architects practise invite examination. It has connotations not only for the United Kingdom but world wide and it is beyond the ambit of statutory protection of title. The technical sufficiency of buildings, the public interest is secured in the United Kingdom under Building Regulations and this too is beyond the statutory protection of the title architect. Protection of the title ‘architect’ for business entities is of no relevance for securing the performance of architectural services. The question of obsolescence has been intensified by the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, effective from 2007. Statutory registration had its origin within the profession in the latter part of the nineteenth century. It was then a matter of controversy, however, by 1905 the RIBA had established a policy to secure satisfactory training of architects by statutory means. The basis of the policy had always been that the profession was governed by associations of practising architects. This was reflected in the composition of the body established by the 1931 Act. Shortly after, in the book published on occasion of the Institutes centenary celebration in 1934, chairman of the Registration Committee, wrote -. I do not conceive the purpose of the Registration Act to be that of protecting the Architectural profession, the interests of the Profession are of course legitimate but are best served by the Architectural Associations in which some 80 per cent of those practising architecture are to be found

4.
Bailiff
–
A bailiff is a manager, overseer or custodian, a legal officer to whom some degree of authority or jurisdiction is given. Bailiffs are of various kinds and their offices and duties vary greatly, another official sometimes referred to as a bailiff was the vogt, see Vogt and Vogt. In the Holy Roman Empire a similar function was performed by the Amtmann, Bailiff was the term used by the Normans for what the Saxons had called a reeve, the officer responsible for executing the decisions of a court. The duty of the bailiff would thus include serving summonses and orders, the district within which the bailiff operated was called his bailiwick, even to the present day. Bailiffs were outsiders and free men, that is, they were not usually from the bailiwick they were responsible for. Throughout Norman England, the Saxon and Norman populations gradually mixed, primarily then, bailiff referred to the officer executing the decisions of manorial courts, and the hundred courts. Likewise, in Scotland a bailie was the officer of a barony. With the introduction of Justices of the Peace, magistrates courts acquired their own bailiffs, historically, courts were not always concerned with legal matters, and often decided administrative matters for the area within their jurisdiction. A bailiff of a manor, therefore, would oversee the manors lands and buildings, collect its rents, manage its accounts. In the 19th century, the functions of courts were mostly replaced by the creation of elected local authorities. Nevertheless, the bailiff is retained as a title by the chief officers of various towns and the keepers of royal castles, such as the High Bailiff of Westminster. In Scotland, bailie now refers to an officer corresponding to an English alderman. The high court acquired the sheriffs, the county court the bailiffs, to avoid confusion with their underlings, the County Courts Act 1888 renamed bailifs as High Bailiffs. This act also formally acknowledged the High Bailiffs right to appoint under-bailiffs as he wished, the High Bailiff gradually became a purely ceremonial role, the courts clerk liaising with under-bailiffs directly. The Law of Distress Amendment Act 1888 enacts that no person may act as an under-bailiff to levy any distress for rent, unless he is authorized by a county court judge to act as an under-bailiff. The County Courts Act 1888 restricted the hours an under-bailiff could execute a possession warrant and it also limited the ability to bring a legal complaint against a bailiff, six days notice now had to be given. In the Channel Islands the bailiff is the first civil officer in each of the two bailiwicks and he is appointed by the Crown, and holds office until retirement. He presides as a judge in the court, and takes the opinions of the jurats, he also presides over the states

5.
Barrister
–
A barrister is a type of lawyer in common law jurisdictions. Barristers mostly specialise in courtroom advocacy and litigation and their tasks include taking cases in superior courts and tribunals, drafting legal pleadings, researching the philosophy, hypothesis and history of law, and giving expert legal opinions. Often, barristers are also recognised as legal scholars, Barristers are distinguished from solicitors, who have more direct access to clients, and may do transactional-type legal work. It is mainly barristers who are appointed as judges, and they are hired by clients directly. In England and Wales, barristers may seek authorisation from the Bar Standards Board to conduct litigation and this allows a barrister to practise in a dual capacity, fulfilling the role of both barrister and solicitor. A barrister, who can be considered as a jurist, is a lawyer who represents a litigant as advocate before a court of appropriate jurisdiction, a barrister speaks in court and presents the case before a judge or jury. In some jurisdictions, a barrister receives additional training in law, ethics. In contrast, a solicitor generally meets with clients, does preparatory and administrative work, in this role, he or she may draft and review legal documents, interact with the client as necessary, prepare evidence, and generally manage the day-to-day administration of a lawsuit. Barristers usually have particular knowledge of law, precedent. When a solicitor in general practice is confronted with a point of law. In most countries, barristers operate as sole practitioners, and are prohibited from forming partnerships or from working as a barrister as part of a corporation, however, barristers normally band together into chambers to share clerks and operating expenses. Some chambers grow to be large and sophisticated, and have a corporate feel. In some jurisdictions, they may be employed by firms of solicitors, banks, in contrast, solicitors and attorneys work directly with the clients and are responsible for engaging a barrister with the appropriate expertise for the case. Barristers generally have little or no contact with their lay clients. All correspondence, inquiries, invoices, and so on, will be addressed to the solicitor, in court, barristers are often visibly distinguished from solicitors by their apparel. For example, in Ireland, England, and Wales, a barrister usually wears a wig, stiff collar, bands. Since January 2008, solicitor advocates have also been entitled to wear wigs, in many countries the traditional divisions between barristers and solicitors are breaking down. Barristers once enjoyed a monopoly on appearances before the courts, but in Great Britain this has now been abolished

6.
British Islands
–
The Isle of Man and the two Bailiwicks are Crown dependencies and are not a part of the United Kingdom. The Parliament of the United Kingdom on occasions introduces legislation that is extended to the islands, for this reason it has been found useful to have a collective term for the combined territories. Dating back to 1889, a definition can be found in the Interpretation Act 1978. The term United Kingdom and Islands is used in the Immigration Act 1971, British passports issued in the UK have the wording United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on their cover. In the Crown dependencies, this is replaced by British Islands – Bailiwick of Jersey and these passports are issued to all British citizens resident in the jurisdiction in question. Subject to paragraph 4 of Schedule 2, that paragraph of Schedule 1 applies, so far as applicable, the Irish Free State was established on 6 December 1922 and the Interpretation Act 1978 came into force on 1 January 1979

7.
British nationality law
–
British nationality law is the law of the United Kingdom which concerns citizenship and other categories of British nationality. The law is due to the United Kingdoms historical status as an imperial power. Some thought the single Imperial status of British subject as increasingly inadequate to deal with a Commonwealth with independent member states. The British Nationality Act 1948 established the status of Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies, the national citizenship of the United Kingdom and colonies on 1 January 1949. Until the early 1960s there was little difference, if any, in UK law between the rights of CUKCs and other British subjects, all of whom had the right at any time to enter and live in the UK. Independence Acts, passed when the colonies were granted independence. In general, these provisions withdrew the status of CUKC from anyone who became citizens of the independent country. Exceptions were sometimes made in cases where the colonies did not become independent, the principal British nationality law now in force is the British Nationality Act 1981, which established the current system of multiple categories of British nationality, viz. British citizens, British Overseas Territories citizens, British Overseas citizens, British Nationals, British subjects, only British citizens and certain Commonwealth citizens have the automatic right of abode in the UK. The 1981 Act ceased to recognise Commonwealth citizens as British subjects, British subjects connected with former British India lose British nationality if they acquire any other. There are currently six classes of British national, British citizen British citizens usually hold this status through a connection with the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man. British citizenship is the most common type of British nationality, other rights can vary according to how the British citizenship was acquired. In particular there are restrictions for British citizens by descent transmitting British citizenship to children born outside the UK and these restrictions do not apply to British citizens otherwise than by descent. British Overseas Territories citizen BOTC is the form of British nationality held by connection with a British Overseas Territory and it is possible to hold BOTC and British citizenship simultaneously. Nearly all are now also British citizens as a result of the British Overseas Territories Act 2002, the four residual categories are expected to become extinct with the passage of time. They can be passed to only in exceptional circumstances, e. g. if the child would otherwise be stateless. There is consequently little provision for the acquisition of these classes of nationality by people who do not already have them, British Overseas citizen In general, most BOCs are CUKCs who did not qualify for British citizenship or British Dependent Territories citizenship. This is fairly uncommon, most CUKCs lost their CUKC status upon independence, in 1997, BDTCs with a connection to Hong Kong became BOCs after they did not register as British Nationals and would become stateless after the withdrawal of BDTC status from Hong Kong residents

8.
British Supreme Court for China
–
The court also heard appeals from consular courts in China, Japan and Korea and from the British Court for Japan which was established in 1879. Britain had acquired rights in China under the Treaty of Nanking in 1842. Subsequently, under the Treaty of Tientsin, these rights were provided for directly in a Sino-British Treaty, in 1858, Britain obtained extraterritorial rights in Japan under the Anglo-Japanese Treaty of Amity and Commerce. The Treaty of Tientsin specified how such jurisdiction was to be governed, for criminal acts, Chinese subjects would be arrested and punished by the Chinese authorities, according to Chinese law. In similar fashion, British subjects tried and punished by the Consul, or other public functionary authorized thereto, according to British law. Where a British subject wished to lodge a complaint against a Chinese subject, or vice versa, it had to be presented to the British consul, who would do his utmost to arrange it amicably. Failing that, he shall request the assistance of the Chinese authorities, that they may together examine into the merits of the case, matters relating to complaints were not considered to be judicial. Appeals from British consular courts initially went to the Supreme Court of Hong Kong, the Court for Japan also heard appeals from consular courts in Japan. Appeals from the Court for Japan were heard by the Chief Justice, the United Kingdom later obtained extraterritoriality in Korea as a result of the United Kingdom–Korea Treaty of 1883. The courts jurisdiction was extended there in 1884, but the courts name remained unchanged. Under the terms of the Anglo-Japanese Treaty of Commerce and Navigation of 1894, the court was renamed the British Supreme Court for China and Corea in 1900. The Court for Japan officially heard its last case, which had been filed before the end of July 1899, under the Japan-Korea Treaty of 1910, Korea was annexed by Japan and Britain automatically lost extraterritorial rights in Korea. The court was, in January 1911, renamed the British Supreme Court for China, in the 1920s there were negotiations with China to give up extraterritorial rights. In 1930 and 1931, after the Kuomingtang consolidated their rule in China, the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931 and then Northern China in 1937 put the issue on the backburner. The Court effectively ceased to function on 8 December 1941 when the Japanese Navy occupied the premises at the start of the Pacific War. After 9 months internship, either at home or in the Cathay Hotel, the United States gave up its extraterritorial rights at the same time. The court therefore had had jurisdiction over British subjects in Korea for 27 years, in Japan for 34 years, in Shanghai, the court was housed in the British Consulate compound. From 1865 to 1871 cases were heard using the rooms that had used by the consular court